都市自我組織－制度與空間演變的模擬比較

Urban Self-organization-A Simulation Comparison between Institutional and Spatial Change

10.6161/jgs.2012.67.03

賴世剛(Shih-Kung Lai)；王昱智(Yu-Chie Wang)；韓昊英(Hao-Ying Han)

自我組織 ； 個體基礎建模 ； 空間垃圾桶模型 ； 人工社會 ； self-organization ； agent-based modeling ； spatial garbage can model ； artificial society

地理學報

67期（2012 / 12 / 01）

49 - 71

繁體中文

自複雜科學興起以來，已漸成為探討都市發展演變的典範。相較於傳統的數理模型，以複雜理論探討都市發展可彌補其不足之處，包含了可處理不同類型的個體，以及可模擬出更貼近真實世界中個體的有限理性等特性。近年來，基於個體之模擬（Agent-Based Modeling, ABM）在社會科學研究逐漸受到重視。其概念與Cellular Automata（CA）相似，但是ABM相對於CA在探討都市發展上更貼近真實環境。雖然如此，ABM仍有其侷限之處，如甚少研究針對於無法碰觸的抽象個體，像是決策的選擇機會。空間垃圾桶模型（Spatial Garbage Can Model, SGCM）正是以一種概念性的模型，來探討都市發展，因此本研究以ABM重新詮釋SGCM，並加入了適應性與可逆性之概念，將SGCM重新表現為一人工社會，來探討此系統是否為一自我組織的系統，以及制度與空間何者對於都市發展影響較為顯著。最後結果發現，系統呈現自我組織的現象，而且發現制度在解決問題的效率上較空間來的高，以及空間之相對自我組織性較制度為高。且制度與空間之間相互作用顯著，顯示在都市發展中，制度與空間是互相影響的，因此在都市規劃上，應同時著重兩者，而非僅以空間規劃為主。

Since the rise of Complex Science, it has emerged as the new paradigm of urban evolution. Compared with the traditional mathematical model, exploring the urban development with complexity theory can help us understand the structure of a city, such as the handling of different types of agents and the characteristics of limited rationality. Recently, Agent-Based Modeling (ABM) has been introduced in social sciences. ABM is similar to Cellular Automata (CA), but it is more effective in modeling the real world of urban development. Nevertheless, ABM has its limitation in studying intangible entities such as the strategy of decision making. Spatial Garbage Can Model (SGCM) is a conceptual model to explore urban development. This research intends to reconstruct the SGCM through ABM, and incorporate adaptability and irreversibility, by viewing the SGCM as an artificial society and testing this system in terms of self-organization, as well as finding out institutional and spatial emergence which influence urban development processes. Results showed that the system self-organized itself, that institutional structures were more efficient in problem-solving than spatial structures, and that the characteristics of self-organization of spatial structures were more significant than institutional structures. In addition, the interaction between spatial and institutional structures was significant. The implication is that we should focus on both in making plans for urban development, rather than solely on spatial structures as traditionally practiced.

1. Batty, M. 2003. Agent, cells and cities: New representational modeling for simulating multi-scale urban dynamics. Working Paper Series 65. Centre for Advanced Spatial Analysis
2. Lotka, A. J. 1925. Elements of physical biology. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins
3. Shannon, C. E. 1949. Communication theory of secrecy systems. Bell System Technical Journal 28 (4): 656-715
4. Anas, A.,Arnott, R.,Small, K. A.(1998).Urban spatial structure.Journal of Economic Literature,36(3),1426-64.
5. Batty, M.(2005).Cities and complexity: Understanding cities with cellular automata, agent-based modeling, and fractals.London:MIT Press.
6. Batty, M.(1997).Cellular automata and urban form: A primer.Journal of the American Planning Association,63,266-74.
7. Benenson, I.(1998).Multi-agent simulations of residential dynamics in the city.Computers, Environment and Urban Systems,22(1),25-42.
8. Benenson, I.,Omer, I.,Hatna, E.(2002).Entity-based modeling of urban residential dynamics: The case of Yaffo, Tel Aviv.Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design,29(4),491-512.
9. Briassoulis, H.(2008).Land-use policy and planning, theorizing, and modeling: Lost in translation, found in complexity?.Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design,35(1),16-33.
10. Clarke, K. C.,Hoppen, S.,Gaydos, L.(1997).A self-modifying cellular automaton modeling of historical urbanization in the San Francisco Bay area.Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design,24(2),247-61.
11. Cohen, M. D.,March, J. G.,Olsen, J. P.(1972).A garbage can modeling of organizational choice.Administrative Science Quarterly,17(1),1-25.
12. Dorn, J. A.(Ed.),Hanke, S. H.(Ed.),Walters, A. A.(Ed.)(1998).The revolution in development economics.Washington:Cato Institute.
13. Epstein, J. M.,Axtell, R.(1996).Growing artificial societies: Social science from the bottom up.Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.
14. Fioretti, G.,Lomi, A.(2008).Agent-based representation of the garbage can modeling of organizational choice.Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation,11(1)
15. Gardner, M.(1970).Mathematical games: The fantastic combinations of John Conway's new solitaire game "life".Scientific American,223,120-3.
16. Hanley, P. F.,Hopkins, L. D.(2007).Do sewer extension plans affect urban development? A multiagent simulation.Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design,34(1),6-27.
17. Hoch, C.(2007).Making plans: Representation and intention.Planning Theory,6(1),16-35.
18. Hopkins, L. D.(2001).Urban development: The logic of making plans.London:Island Press.
19. Hopkins, L. D.、賴世剛譯(2005)。都市發展制定計畫的邏輯。臺北=Taipei:五南圖書出版股份有限公司=Wu-Nan Book Inc.。
20. Krugman, P.(1996).The self-organizing economy.Cambridge, Massachusetts:Blackwell Publishers Inc..
21. Lai, S. K.(2006).A spatial garbage-can model.Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design,33(1),379-89.
22. Ligtenberg, A.,Bregt, A. K.,van Lammeren, R.(2001).Multi-actor-based land use modelling: Spatial planning using agents.Landscape and Urban Planning,56(1/2),21-33.
23. Pacault, A.,Vidal, C.(1978).Synergetics, far from equilibrium: Proceedings of the conference far from equilibrium: Instabilities and structures.Bordeaux, France:Springer.
24. Portugali, J.(2000).Self-organization and the city.Berlin:Springer-Verlag.
25. Troitzsch, K. G.(2009).Perspectives and challenges of agent-based simulation as a tool for economics and other social sciences.8th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2009),Budapest, Hungary:
26. Troitzsch, K. G.(2008).The garbage can model of organizational behaviour: A theoretical reconstruction of some of its variants.Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory,16(2),218-30.
27. von Neumann, J.,Burks, Arthur(ed. comp.)(1966).Theory of self-reproducing automata.Champaign, Illinois:University of Illinois Press.
28. Wolf, T. D.,Holvoet, T.(2005).Emergence versus self-organisation: Different concepts but promising when combined.Engineering self organising systems: Methodologies and applications,Berlin:
29. Wu, F.,Webster, C. J.(2000).Simulating artificial cities in a GIS environment: Urban growth under alternative regulation regimes.International Journal of Geographical Information Science,14(7),625-48.
30. 王飛躍、史蒂夫•蘭森(2004)。從人工生命到人工社會－複雜社會系統的現狀和展望。學會月刊，5，42-7。
31. 陳建元、游繁結、羅俊雄、陳天健、李文正(2005)。細胞自動機的介紹及其在土石流災害模擬的初步應用。中華水土保持學報，36(3)，293-300。
32. 葉季栩(2003)。臺北=Taipei，國立臺北大學都市計劃研究所=Graduate Institute of Urban Planning, National Taipei University。
33. 黎夏、葉嘉安(2005)。基於神經網絡的元胞自動機及模擬複雜土地利用系统。地理研究，24(1)，19-27。
34. 黎夏、葉嘉安、劉小平、楊青生(2007)。地理模擬系統：元胞自動機與多智能體。北京=Beijing:科學出版社=Science Press。
35. 賴世剛(2006)。都市、複雜與規劃－理解並改善都市發展。臺北=Taipei:詹氏書局=Chan's Arch-Publishing Co., Ltd.。
36. 賴世剛、高宏軒(2001)。都市複雜空間系統自我組織臨界性之初探。建築與城鄉研究學報，10，31-44。
37. 薛明生、賴世剛(2002)。人口分布自組性之時空尺度特性－臺灣本島之實證研究。台灣土地研究，5，67-86。
38. 薛領、楊開忠、沈體雁(2004)。基於Agent 的建模－地理計算的新發展。地球科學發展，19(2)，305-11。
39. 薛曉源、陳家剛(2007)。全球化與新制度主義。臺北=Taipei:五南圖書出版股份有限公司=Wu-Nan Book Inc.。

1. 黃明利,吳連賞(2022)。東港現代商業階層的形成。地理研究，76，1-42。
2. 賴世剛,陳志閣,柯博晟(2022)。土地開發過程中自我組織特性之探討：經濟財產權、賽局理論及電腦模擬分析。建築與規劃學報，22(1&2)，1-18。
3. 賴世剛、黃仲由(2015)。都市發展理論之傳統與過渡趨向生物有機增長的思考方式。地理學報，79，31-64。
4. 賴世剛、游凱為、郭修謙(2018)。空間垃圾桶模式外在效度之實證檢驗：以台北市為例。都市與計劃，45(1)，1-24。